For years, I have listened to KPBS, our local National Public Radio station, almost daily.
My view of the world has been shaped by its news and commentary. Whether the issue is racial justice, reproductive rights, mass incarceration, universal health care, the right to organize, or creating a path to citizenship, KPBS has covered it all with well-written stories and in-depth interviews.
KPBS has also led me into fascinating nooks and crannies of science and culture. Tuvan throat singing and the DNA of the Lemba are two that come to mind.
I like to be surprised, and KPBS has often surprised me.
So, I wasn’t thrilled when I read recently that President Donald Trump had directed the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) to stop funding NPR and its member stations, but neither was I surprised.
I mean, it’s no secret that the folks at NPR and Trump have different agendas.
Can KPBS be saved? I certainly hope so. After examining the divide between NPR and Trump and considering an allegory and a counterfactual, I’ll suggest a way forward for KPBS if that funding is cut.
About a year ago, I read an essay by Uri Berliner, “I’ve Been at NPR for 25 Years. Here’s How We Lost America’s Trust,” that explored what he saw as changes at NPR and its relationship with Trump. Mr. Berliner was then a senior editor at NPR, having been with them for 25 years.
In his view, over the previous dozen or so years, NPR had gone from being a somewhat nerdy, slightly left-of-center content creator that always tried to be objective to something more like an “assembly line for polemics” for progressive causes. He went on to suggest that they had then gone from being a proponent for such causes to being an active opponent of the administration:
“…What began as tough, straightforward coverage of a belligerent, truth-impaired president veered toward efforts to damage or topple Trump’s presidency.”
In his telling, things then went beyond that. There were times when credible bodies of evidence contradicting the preferred prosecutorial narrative were not covered because, in one colleague’s words, they “could help Trump.”
And when a storyline potentially damaging to the flamboyant president that had been covered for months collapsed because no credible evidence could be found to support it, NPR’s reaction was to “pretend it never happened.”
Berliner also speculated that one result of this selective coverage was that NPR’s audience was being “cramped into a smaller, progressive silo.” As an aside, one wonders whether this “cramping” might help explain the 2024 election results.
More to the point, if Mr. Berliner is correct and NPR is no longer a team of non-aligned journalists reporting on the political battles of others, but has instead become a sort of band of ideologically motivated combatants, should we be surprised when the guy they are attacking fights back?
No more than we should be surprised to read that Mr. Berliner is no longer with NPR, I suppose.
Of course, some say that NPR is not promoting any political ideology at all, but is simply objectively reporting the truth, which happens to comport with a fairly progressive agenda. They probably say this for one of three reasons:
(1) They have never listened to NPR’s news and commentary. (They really should.),
(2) They listen to NPR and sincerely believe its coverage does not lean left. (These people must be deeply siloed, cut off from the wider world.) Or,
(3) They are simply trying to protect NPR’s funding. (“Who, us? NPR? Progressive? No!” While I sympathize, this shtick lacks credibility. How refreshing it would be to hear one of these people just once come right out and shout, “Yes, NPR is progressive! And that’s a good thing, damn it!” Sort of like Jack Nicholson in “A Few Good Men.” You know, “Yes, I ordered the Code Red!”)
To be fair, there is ample room to the left of NPR. For example, I don’t recall hearing them pushing hard for the 5% annual wealth tax. Perhaps the big donors would squawk.
Now, the allegory.
In a land far away lives Michael, a hard-working family man. Michael has a big heart and strongly believes transformative change is needed to help the struggling working people of his land. He even carries in his pocket a list of proposals that he believes will someday bring about this change.
The rulers of the land have created a radio station. It is paid for by the taxpayers, Michael included. Every day, all day, it beams out stories that promote beliefs that directly contradict every proposal on Michael’s list.
Michael feels this is unfair, not because the radio station promotes beliefs contradicting his own. He believes people should be free to broadcast all kinds of opinions. He feels it is unfair because he is being forced to pay for the promotion of beliefs that contradict his. Every day, all day.
Michael often says, “I feel like an atheist being forced to put money in the collection plate.” Michael has a name for the radio station: “Pravda.”
To understand Michael a bit better, consider this stark counterfactual.
In 2025, CPB requested about $140 million to provide grants to NPR member stations. What if the same amount were given to the Heritage Foundation each year so that they could start a radio network to promote the proposals included in Project 2025? Would that make things more equitable?
I’ve always supported KPBS, but not by choice. That is, I have to pay my taxes, a small portion of which trickles down to them. They pester me for more, but I’ve always felt giving them more would be like adding a gratuity to the bottom line of my 1040.
I don’t mind supporting KPBS with my taxes. There are things my taxes help pay for that are of questionable worth, but with KPBS, not only do I get all the news and commentary, I also get to match wits with Will Shortz while I shave on Sunday.
It is not lost on me, however, that many people do not want to support KPBS. There are millions of Michaels out there.
So. Should people be forced to pay for the creation of news and commentary that supports policies that contradict their beliefs? I don’t think so.
Here is my suggestion for saving KPBS if its funding is cut:
We, the people who actually want to support KPBS, should pay for it.
Here’s the math. CPB gives KPBS about a million dollars a year. KPBS has about 300,000 weekly listeners. My share of the missing million would be about three bucks a year. Make it four. I’m in.
I choose to support KPBS. Are you with me?
Scott Chambers is a cartoonist, author and songwriter in Encinitas.
